More apps for LN

[serjent05]

That would be very effective if the only option of payment is LN.  It would be not as effective as you think if there is some other option of payment which is more user-friendly and more convenient to use. Besides if we develop an application for payment, isn't it easier to just have an internal transaction than using LN network?  The app's feature itself then possibly kills the purpose of LN transfers since more probably than not, users will use the convenience of internal transfer.  This is not different from an application that has an internal transfer and an integrated bank transfer.  Most users avail of the internal transfer because it is cheaper(no fee in most applications)  and faster.

You say this because you most likely live in the first industrialized world where everyone relies on their bank to keep their assets and obviously have a MasterCard in their pockets.  Now expand your mind and turn the world map, catapulted into Africa where 90% of the population is Unbanked but will most likely have a smartphone in hand, give it the opportunity to buy something without transition costs without any bank account and in the blink of an eye take a look and tell me if it can work.

I am from a developing country btw, one question, have you used a micropayment application?  If you have, you know it has its feature like an internal transfer,  just like Binance exchanges internal transfer where the transaction is fee less and the transfer is instant.  My point is if you are planning to integrate LN into a payment application and expect users will flock into it and use that feature forgetting about the internal transfer feature of the app, I think you need to re-assess your belief.  People will always use the most convenient and cheapest method available to them and in this case, internal transfer is the most convenient and cheapest option.

We mostly see the sign in some stores about "Bitcoin accepted here" and soon we may see "Bitcoin Lightning Network is accepted here" in some occasions but as of now, I haven't seen any of it yet.

Excuse me why should they display here we accept LN?  Isn't it enough for you to know that they accept Bitcoin?  It is a layer to make Bitcoin transact if the merchant does not know LN then it is our duty to tell him about it and make him understand the advantages, otherwise what are we for?  Just to write two posts in this forum?

Lol, LN transaction is different from on-chain transaction.  The store should specify that they are  LN ready or the customer might think that the store only do on-chain transaction. Btw,  it is not our responsibility to give lectures and teach everyone, if you wanted to volunteer then that's great but don't make it sound like we are responsible for other people's business.  we have our own business to mind too...  Please don't push your ideal to other people.  Other may find your ideal great but others might find it absurd.  People have different POV please bear that in mind.

I am from a developing country btw, one question, have you used a micropayment application?  If you have, you know it has its feature like an internal transfer,  just like Binance exchanges internal transfer where the transaction is fee less and the transfer is instant.  My point is if you are planning to integrate LN into a payment application and expect users will flock into it and use that feature forgetting about the internal transfer feature of the app, I think you need to re-assess your belief.  People will always use the most convenient and cheapest method available to them and in this case, internal transfer is the most convenient and cheapest option.


Lol, LN transaction is different from on-chain transaction.  The store should specify that they are  LN ready or the customer might think that the store only do on-chain transaction. Btw,  it is not our responsibility to give lectures and teach everyone, if you wanted to volunteer then that's great but don't make it sound like we are responsible for other people's business.  we have our own business to mind too...  Please don't push your ideal to other people.  Other may find your ideal great but others might find it absurd.  People have different POV please bear that in mind.

I think I'm wasting my time either you don't want to understand or you pretend you don't understand and therefore I consider all of this signature spam.  No one said Binance, I've always talked about apps that need to take advantage of LN integration in the payment process.  STOP.  As for your point of not wanting to help by coaching that is your point and I ask you to keep it to yourself or you could get someone to do nothing and wait for someone to do it for them.  You see they are points of view.

I understand your point but we are just citing the other possibilities which you do not accept.  and even mistaken the examples as point of dicussion...  anyway.. whatever you say, your thread your rule.

[mendace]

I am from a developing country btw, one question, have you used a micropayment application?  If you have, you know it has its feature like an internal transfer,  just like Binance exchanges internal transfer where the transaction is fee less and the transfer is instant.  My point is if you are planning to integrate LN into a payment application and expect users will flock into it and use that feature forgetting about the internal transfer feature of the app, I think you need to re-assess your belief.  People will always use the most convenient and cheapest method available to them and in this case, internal transfer is the most convenient and cheapest option.


Lol, LN transaction is different from on-chain transaction.  The store should specify that they are  LN ready or the customer might think that the store only do on-chain transaction. Btw,  it is not our responsibility to give lectures and teach everyone, if you wanted to volunteer then that's great but don't make it sound like we are responsible for other people's business.  we have our own business to mind too...  Please don't push your ideal to other people.  Other may find your ideal great but others might find it absurd.  People have different POV please bear that in mind.

I think I'm wasting my time either you don't want to understand or you pretend you don't understand and therefore I consider all of this signature spam.  No one said Binance, I've always talked about apps that need to take advantage of LN integration in the payment process.  STOP.  As for your point of not wanting to help by coaching that is your point and I ask you to keep it to yourself or you could get someone to do nothing and wait for someone to do it for them.  You see they are points of view.

[blockman]

We mostly see the sign in some stores about "Bitcoin accepted here" and soon we may see "Bitcoin Lightning Network is accepted here" in some occasions but as of now, I haven't seen any of it yet.

Excuse me why should they display here we accept LN?  Isn't it enough for you to know that they accept Bitcoin?

What I am saying are those merchants. It's more than enough that they know Bitcoin but it seems that when the network is too traffic and people say that there's another solution which is the usage and acceptance of LN.

It is a layer to make Bitcoin transact if the merchant does not know LN then it is our duty to tell him about it and make him understand the advantages, otherwise what are we for?

Yeah, we've got some duty to do to say that to them but if they don't like to try it then that's where the adoption rate should start from.

[franky1]

the LN lemmings want exchanges to offer LN instead of onchain withdrawals..
kind of funny how they want users to select LN where the exchange does not actually give users coins confirmed on users own private key but instead where its unsettled balance still held on an exchanges keys but propositioned(promised(iou)) to the user in the form of what they call "inbound balance"

an exchange wont want to close a channel with a customer but want the customer to then request that inbound balance be pushed back to the CEX where the cex then gives it to someone elses balance. basically locking a customer in until the customer has spent all their balance back to the cex

read the article again without the utopian dream of thinking its about more people getting to use real bitcoin and realise its just more custodian held balance.... and people locking that balance in another network
(look at the average lifetime stats of a channel and realise people dont, cant, wont easily close a channel regularly, especially more difficult when the balance is on the exchanges side where users are just "renting msats" as inbound balance(the policy of the factory(custodian) ln nodes))

and a reminder
LN is not the bitcoin network
the "payment" data of an onion packet relayed around LN is nothing at all like a bitcoin transaction being relayed.
bitcoin does not understand msats. never will and never should because that would break alot of fundamental laws of bitcoin medium of exchange unit count, halving times, value proposition, utility, total shareable units and such.

trying to make bitcoin compatible with LN is breaking bitcoin, which is an insane thing to promote.. LN should be trying to be compatible with bitcoin.. not the other way around
LN has no consensus system no network wide protocol. so its easier for LN to adapt to bitcoin rules. so why are soo many people advocating to break bitcoin to try making LN work
if L cant work as is then LN is flawed. they should change LN not break bitcoin more.

in short. LN does not offer people the bitcoin experience nor will they want to offer easy methods to get out of LN to use the real bitcoin network. so stop trying to pretend that LN is bitcoin while telling people to stop using the actual bitcoin network just to promote something that is not bitcoin

[NotATether]

I found this interesting post that I recommend reading and I wanted to share it with you here. I don't want to spoil the whole article but it basically argues that we need more apps that leverage LN and not new wallets to pay with LN.  As clearly, the Fiat currency is widely supported in our devices where everything can be paid in our apps, so we must also try to implement payments with LN so that this can reach mass adoption.

That logic and the one about phones is flawed. Would you make an app for an OS that has a buggy App Store and extremely broken kernel and UI? This is a metaphor.

This is cliché by now, but I will say this again:

Currently as far as mobile wallets are concerned, yes we have a lot of them that support Lightning Network. The situation on desktop, on the other hand, is woeful. It is so bad, that I challenge you to list at least three Lightning-enabled desktop wallets that are not full nodes (so no LND or clightning).

Most likely you'll only come up with 1. Bonus points for you if you find a second one.

What is the purpose of making apps for LN if nobody can even interact with them? Are we going to start telling people that they need to install a wallet on their mobile device in order to use Lightning? Historically, mobile phones and tablets are the #1 most stolen items, after money itself.

That is not to say that LN is perfect. There are some problems with the current design, such as quirks in channel funding making it much harder to run a non-custodial channel - and solutions for those problems (channel factories) are forthcoming, but they need to be developed too!

LN apps are the last thing on the bucket list.

[mendace]

I found this interesting post that I recommend reading and I wanted to share it with you here. I don't want to spoil the whole article but it basically argues that we need more apps that leverage LN and not new wallets to pay with LN.  As clearly, the Fiat currency is widely supported in our devices where everything can be paid in our apps, so we must also try to implement payments with LN so that this can reach mass adoption.

That logic and the one about phones is flawed. Would you make an app for an OS that has a buggy App Store and extremely broken kernel and UI? This is a metaphor.

This is cliché by now, but I will say this again:

Currently as far as mobile wallets are concerned, yes we have a lot of them that support Lightning Network. The situation on desktop, on the other hand, is woeful. It is so bad, that I challenge you to list at least three Lightning-enabled desktop wallets that are not full nodes (so no LND or clightning).

Most likely you'll only come up with 1. Bonus points for you if you find a second one.

What is the purpose of making apps for LN if nobody can even interact with them? Are we going to start telling people that they need to install a wallet on their mobile device in order to use Lightning? Historically, mobile phones and tablets are the #1 most stolen items, after money itself.

That is not to say that LN is perfect. There are some problems with the current design, such as quirks in channel funding making it much harder to run a non-custodial channel - and solutions for those problems (channel factories) are forthcoming, but they need to be developed too!

LN apps are the last thing on the bucket list.

It seems to me that you said a lot of absurd things.  Meanwhile, this logic applies very well to the development of LN, smartphones have replaced cameras, video cameras, GPS navigators, home telephones, and even PCs in internet browsing, so they are also excellent for the development of LN in a very fast way.

You ask me what is a good desktop wallet, I ask "why would I want one"?  LN is a technology suitable for life on the move, for fast everyday payments, those that are made from mobile phones and furthermore you really don't understand what we are talking about because apps must be on mobile phones, they must not integrate any wallet and above all they just need to charge for the service through the use of LN, so a callback to u will suffice.  wallets like Alby or wallet of Satoshi which are custodial and work great for micropayments.

[suzanne5223]

@mendace, You can't use your stance to judge what everybody in the Bitcoin community wants. Therefore, you ought to speak for yourself and dont say " Nobody wants more LN wallets we don't need them". Why is the Binance integration of LN will be the biggest defeat for BTC?

Because it would be like having thousands of car models each doing something better than the other and ultimately having no roads to drive them on, that's why I say we don't need new portfolios, do you feel the need for other portfolios for LN?  While for Binance obviously it will be a defeat if people get to know LN through this, and if you haven't figured it out yet then you should try to study the real mission of Bitcoin and not answer with such absurd things.
Binance is the largest centralized exchange at the moment but it has nothing different than FTx or the rock trading will come its time and fuck the money of poor people because not your keys not your coins so I don't have to say more if you can understand.

Nevertheless, every new idea and innovative creation is still welcome into the cryptocurrency market but if people feel there's no need for it they won't support or make use of the wallet.
I never Binance was different from FTX but the exchange integrating LN is never a defeat to Bitcoin and if you know it was to complement Bitcoin you won't have reason in an absurd manner.
Take it or you leave if things continue like this there's no way people won't learn about LN or another alternative will be introduced.

[southerngentuk]

I think the limited acceptance of Bitcoin as a payment option is an obstacle to the widespread use of LN for day-to-day transactions. By integrating LN into popular apps and platforms, users will have more opportunities to interact with LN, even if they cannot directly use it in stores, which can help create a network effect and increase LN usage among users. Also, as the LN ecosystem expands with more apps integrating LN functionality and a growing community of regular LN users, it may lead to increased interest from sellers and incentivize them to accept LN as a payment option.

[mendace]

I think the limited acceptance of Bitcoin as a payment option is an obstacle to the widespread use of LN for day-to-day transactions. By integrating LN into popular apps and platforms, users will have more opportunities to interact with LN, even if they cannot directly use it in stores, which can help create a network effect and increase LN usage among users. Also, as the LN ecosystem expands with more apps integrating LN functionality and a growing community of regular LN users, it may lead to increased interest from sellers and incentivize them to accept LN as a payment option.

Exactly, I mean this we must not think that LN is not mature or that there are not yet good wallets but simply accept that other applications take advantage of LN payments exactly as they do with PayPal or the MasterCard circuit so it will be possible to see greater growth and improvement of LN also due to the fact that more transactions bring more profits to developers' coffers.